pete 319 Posted March 4, 2016 Ruddy in goal I guess.Defence back to four depending on fit CB''s Klose or Bassong on left if unfit Bennett and Martin Full Backs Brady and Olsson, Martin if CB is fit.Mulumbu as defensive midfielder to be encourage by Alex T missing rest of season.Midfield of Naismith on left, Redmond on right, Hoolahan attacking with two up front one to be Bamford.Need to attack not sit back score first and hope for the best.Sure Alex will fit Howson in somewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ec-p 90 Posted March 4, 2016 Would keep 3/5 at the back if fit. O''Neil for Tettey, Naismith up top ( can''t see this happening) , rest of team the same. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted March 4, 2016 Oneill in for Tettey. Naismith to replace Wes possibly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray 111 Posted March 4, 2016 Personally I would work on the; ''if it ain''t broke don''t fix it'' methodology for the defence particularly, 5 at the back has worked a damn sight better than 4 at the back recently, so why change it. The players have got into the swing of it so continue with what they know (and like). Probably Naismith for Hoolahan and then up front, well who knows? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJP 79 Posted March 4, 2016 We aren''t winning games with it or getting results. I''m not saying we couldn''t but when you''re losing games you can''t see it ain''t broke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
If wed only kept Howie.. 3 Posted March 4, 2016 Depending on 4 or 5 at the back:RuddyMartin, Bennett, Klose, BradyRedmond, Howson, O''Neil, NaismithHoolahan"A Striker"RuddyPinto, Bennett, Martin, Klose, BradyRedmond, Howson, O''Neil, Naismith"A Striker" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 4, 2016 [quote user="Ray"]Personally I would work on the; ''if it ain''t broke don''t fix it'' methodology for the defence particularly, 5 at the back has worked a damn sight better than 4 at the back recently, so why change it. The players have got into the swing of it so continue with what they know (and like).[/quote]You''re joking, right? The back five was hopeless in the first half against Chelsea. Three centre backs who didn''t have a clue who to mark, where to stand, when to step out or when to drop deep. While the midfield got outnumbered and overrun. Was blind luck Chelsea didn''t score more. Only when we ditched the back five that the team looked vaguely comfortable. Wonder if some people actually watch our games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted March 4, 2016 This is the team that I think will play:--------------Ruddy------------Pinto--Martin--Klose--Brady---------O''Neil--Howson-----Redmond---Naismith---Wes--------------Jerome---------- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted March 4, 2016 Indeed Pete, the back 5 didn''t work as our defenders were just marking 1 striker leaving our midfield with too much space in it.The frustrating thing about it is that AN said this in his PRE-match interview; so he knew it was going to happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray 111 Posted March 4, 2016 Pyro,Not sure why you thought I was joking other than you feel your opinion is the only one, you certainly post as if that is the case.Five at the back, if played properly quickly becomes 3 at the back allowing ''maruading'' wing backs to get forward and help the midfield and forwards, and as Pinto (imo) is not a defensive FB this system is best suited to his style, assuming he is picked.Chelsea''s midfield outnumber and overrun, not to mention outpace, almost any midfield, it''s what they do, so the fact we may have been overrun at times is hardly surprising.Yes when we went to a back four we looked more like scoring, but that may have beem because we went 2 up front?Finally, just because someone has a different opinion to you, doesn''t mean they don''t go to the game, I most certainly do, however I see things a little differently to you and maybe, just maybe I have a better insight, but then again I may not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellow Green Army 237 Posted March 4, 2016 Jerome needs to be rested tomorrow, missing to many chances and his confidence must be low. I would start with Mbokani and tell him to work his socks off and have a real battle with Ashley Williams. Bamford would be my shout from the bench early in the second half.There is no way that Hooligan should be dropped for this one. MOM against Chelsea and only one of two players at the club who can create out of nothing.RuddyMartin Pinto Bennet Klose BradyO''Neil Howson Redmond HoolahanMbokaniBamford, Naismith and Jarvis to come off the bench. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 4, 2016 [quote user="Ray"]Pyro,Not sure why you thought I was joking other than you feel your opinion is the only one, you certainly post as if that is the case.Five at the back, if played properly quickly becomes 3 at the back allowing ''maruading'' wing backs to get forward and help the midfield and forwards, and as Pinto (imo) is not a defensive FB this system is best suited to his style, assuming he is picked.Chelsea''s midfield outnumber and overrun, not to mention outpace, almost any midfield, it''s what they do, so the fact we may have been overrun at times is hardly surprising.Yes when we went to a back four we looked more like scoring, but that may have beem because we went 2 up front?Finally, just because someone has a different opinion to you, doesn''t mean they don''t go to the game, I most certainly do, however I see things a little differently to you and maybe, just maybe I have a better insight, but then again I may not?[/quote]Agree with you completely that a back five can be highly effective if deployed correctly. However, defensively, little of that was in evidence on Tuesday. I was simply surprised by your statement that "if it ain''t broke..." when, in my view and as another poster pointed out, there is little evidence so far that the back five has fixed anything, and therefore I disagree, and stated why. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sgncfc 1,227 Posted March 4, 2016 I think he will go with O''Neill instead of Tettey, Naismith instead of Wes and Bamford instead of Jerome.I think Naismith and Bamford could worry Swansea''s slow centre backs as long as they don''t get isolated so Howson''s performance will once again b e critical.Mulumbu to come on for Naismith once we are two up.Or we could just swap O''Neill for Tettey and lose three nil. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 4, 2016 This is the 11...Ruddy Pinto Martin Klose Brady O''Neil Howson Redmond Hoolahan Naismith Jerome I got the team vs. West Ham correct (posted it the Friday before) so I''m a reliable source, as is my source. As always though, time will tell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AJ 1,219 Posted March 4, 2016 Would be surprised to see Bennett dropped as I feel more comfortable with him at the back and would prefer Martin to Pinto. I''d also like to see Mbokani instead of JeromeRest looks okay though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 4, 2016 Like I say, time will tell. I''d have started Naismith upfront myself but then ive been saying that since he joined and it hasn''t happened once, despite it being his best position. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ec-p 90 Posted March 4, 2016 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]Like I say, time will tell. I''d have started Naismith upfront myself but then ive been saying that since he joined and it hasn''t happened once, despite it being his best position.[/quote]This. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted March 4, 2016 playing upfront on his own is not his best position, but as a front two it wis very good. I say this only from his time at everton; he may turn out to be a good loan striker in our team; he certainly has the finishing ability. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STAN 29 Posted March 4, 2016 RuddyPinto Bennett Klose OlssonDorrans Oneil Redmond Hoolahan Brady Mbokani Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 4, 2016 That''s the thing though - we don''t know until he''s at least tried it. Not like our other strikers are firing on all cylinders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STAN 29 Posted March 4, 2016 Am I only one who''s sick and tired of Brady playing at full back? Don''t get me wrong he''s played well but Olsson''s a handy player and Brady is capable of doing hell of a lot more damage up the other end of the pitch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STAN 29 Posted March 4, 2016 I guess you''re suggesting playing Naismith up top on his own? Naismith Brady Hoolahan Redmond.. an attacking force that averages a height of around 3ft. It might work if we had a central midfield that could dominate play, who are comfortable in possession and that could actually pass more than a few yards. Unfortunately we haven''t. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barclay seats 4849 the 3rd 0 Posted March 4, 2016 Migginsplaying upfront on his own is not his best position, but as a front two it wis very good. I say this only from his time at everton; he may turn out to be a good loan striker in our team; he certainly has the finishing ability. He''s not on loan miggins ,, we bought him . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray 111 Posted March 4, 2016 Pyro,Not sure I agree with you and GJP re little evidence, insomuch as we went 89 miutes looking quite comfortable agianst the league leaders and conceded only one legitimate goal against the current champions, which let''s face it was a massive improvement on the previous games against lesser opposition.I like a back five, given what we''ve got, as it allows us to flood the midfield when necessary and atack with more purpose down the flanks. I also happen to think Klose, Bennett and Martin were/are starting to ''get it together'' after much tinkering. If we go to four at the back tomorrow with Pinto as a FB I have my worries as RM, or whoever, will not be in such a good position to cover his weaknesses, that said if we can continue with the increased passion and purpose we have shown in the last 2 fixtures I will be happy (ish!) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJP 79 Posted March 4, 2016 [quote user="AJ"]Would be surprised to see Bennett dropped as I feel more comfortable with him at the back and would prefer Martin to Pinto. I''d also like to see Mbokani instead of JeromeRest looks okay though[/quote]Given that Bennett, in 4 years at the club, has never been a real, regular first choice player would it be that surprising? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STAN 29 Posted March 4, 2016 The back 5 system was awful against Chelsea, defensively we were all over the place in the first half. We improved when Bennett came off and we switched to 4 at the back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Van wink 2,994 Posted March 4, 2016 Stick with the same team with O''Neil in for Tettey and Bamford for Jerome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
It's Character Forming 1,160 Posted March 4, 2016 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]This is the 11... Ruddy Pinto Martin Klose Brady O''Neil Howson Redmond Hoolahan Naismith Jerome I got the team vs. West Ham correct (posted it the Friday before) so I''m a reliable source, as is my source. As always though, time will tell.[/quote]As you say time will tell - a few aspects of this team would worry me. AN definitely rolling the dice I guess...if this is it, let''s hope it works out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JF 694 Posted March 4, 2016 Klose may not feature after his injury mid week. Massive loss if he doesn''t Share this post Link to post Share on other sites